Montana Trapping Ban

[Summitthunting]

Are all the hippies from Colorado moving to Montana?

http://missoulian.com/news/state-an...cle_e1cd12c4-ce21-11e2-9fde-001a4bcf887a.html

 

[webejmn]

Oh yeah, here we go again. Read the comments, that richardr11 guy is sure full of himself ain't he? I personally think the hippies are from the east although CO wouldnt be a bad guess. Just a bunch of low information folks spouting the crap some organization feeds them. Oh and a lot of these hippies are probably from the state of MT as we have a lot of them here. Have some close or used to be friends that are just mortified by my hunting, But they are the first ones here when I bbq up some venison or birds I shot. Strange how that works. Well we must follow this and stand up again it appears. Not a problem, Unreal!

 

[drahthaar]

This has been coming down the pike for 2 years. They missed getting it on the ballot last time. They will not make the same mistakes this time. I feel it is probably all over for trapping on public lands. The hunting crowd in MT could ban together and vote this down, but apathy seems to rein with hunters in MT.
Right now, I am just trying to think about how FWP can respond to this. I think MT Trappers Assoc, is going to have to change their stance and fight to bring on snaring on private lands, anything to increase the take of wolves to compensate for this loss, and increase season length to kill wolves.
Personally, I feel as far as wolves go, enough can still be taken on private to be effective.
Any thoughts?

 

[shoots-straight]

This has been coming down the pike for 2 years. They missed getting it on the ballot last time. They will not make the same mistakes this time. I feel it is probably all over for trapping on public lands. The hunting crowd in MT could ban together and vote this down, but apathy seems to rein with hunters in MT.
Right now, I am just trying to think about how FWP can respond to this. I think MT Trappers Assoc, is going to have to change their stance and fight to bring on snaring on private lands, anything to increase the take of wolves to compensate for this loss, and increase season length to kill wolves.
Personally, I feel as far as wolves go, enough can still be taken on private to be effective.
Any thoughts?

Oh I don't think trapping is over on pubic lands. I think most of this state's people are still attached to older ways. There's many new comers that long for the old Montana way of life, and that's why they moved here. I think it will be a fight, but if everyone shows up at the fight, we will win handily.

 

[drahthaar]

I know Shoots, if, and its a BIG IF, you can get hunters and their families to the voting booth, it wouldn't be a contest. But hunters just don't seem to show up at the voting booth, or, if you read a lot of hunting forums, there seems to be a pile of hunters that think trapping should be banned.

 

[idnative1948]

So you are saying hunters in general????

"But hunters just don't seem to show up at the voting booth, or, if you read a lot of hunting forums, there seems to be a pile of hunters that think trapping should be banned."

I know Shoots, if, and its a BIG IF, you can get hunters and their families to the voting booth, it wouldn't be a contest. But hunters just don't seem to show up at the voting booth, or, if you read a lot of hunting forums, there seems to be a pile of hunters that think trapping should be banned.

 

[shoots-straight]

I know some houndsman that aren't so friendly towards trapping. They don't understand the bigger picture. Right after the trappers rights fall, the hound hunters would then be in their sights. The steps to no human interference start with the trap.

Sticks divided are easily broken.

 

[Summitthunting]

I hope you guys don't end up like us. Effectively we have no trapping, no spring bear, fewer public land tags and crappy gun laws. This song now reminds me of Colorado


CW McCall Crispy Critters

Well, we gave 'em hell, but we lost the war
'Cause them Critters outnumbered us
So they moved in and set up camp
And they lived in that purple school bus
Six weeks later, there was nothin' in town
But eighty-four dogs and a head shop
Sellin' dried up weeds, and sunflower seeds,
And astrological postcards
Yeah, Critters took over the City Council
And the dogs all barked their brains out
And the whole damn town was Crispy Critters
And the mayor was a space cadet

 

[Ben Lamb]

I know Shoots, if, and its a BIG IF, you can get hunters and their families to the voting booth, it wouldn't be a contest. But hunters just don't seem to show up at the voting booth, or, if you read a lot of hunting forums, there seems to be a pile of hunters that think trapping should be banned.

I think there's a lot of work to be done in reaching out and educating sporting clubs. When it comes to public perception of trappers, there's still an uphill battle. Calm, reasoned debate is always healthy, and in that vein, we win.

The wolf hunting issues have re-invigorated some of these groups and they're more likely to have increased fundraising efforts that will be sucessful due to public outrage over what is percieved as seasons that are too aggressive. Add wolverines, etc into that and you have a toxic mix that will help their cause more than anything else.

 

[dustinf]

Calm, reasoned debate is always healthy, and in that vein, we win.

Word.

 

[shoots-straight]

The wolf hunting issues have re-invigorated some of these groups and they're more likely to have increased fundraising efforts that will be sucessful due to public outrage over what is percieved as seasons that are too aggressive. Add wolverines, etc into that and you have a toxic mix that will help their cause more than anything else.

I thought people where more outraged over the whole wolf program as they perceived it than the new season structures. My take on it, is the majority of those opposed to the new liberal seasons on wolves don't live in Montana.

It's going to be a battle for sure, we need to get out facts.

Supposedly 58 dogs were caught in traps last year. How many were on private lands that they had no business being on? I would like to know how many dogs were killed by cars. How many dogs were poisened? How many shot?

There's no evidence that says wolverine are endangered more now than they were 20 years ago.

Ben, you've stated you don't like trapping. Some in the Wildlife Federation don't either.

Will you and those others that don't like trapping rally behind us and vote against this ban, or the side with the anti's?


If not trapping, then predator control by the Government becomes a reality. Helicopters, poison, snares, and more ADC men. Pandora's box could possibly open.

 

[Ben Lamb]

I thought people where more outraged over the whole wolf program as they perceived it than the new season structures. My take on it, is the majority of those opposed to the new liberal seasons on wolves don't live in Montana.

I think that discounts the reality that there is a majority of Montanans who don't hunt. It's important to remember that there are shifting demographics in this state when it comes to attitudes towards wildlife. This last session should have been an indicator of that. When it came to the bad predator bills, the pro-predator crowd was out in force, often times outweighing our own voices.

Supposedly 58 dogs were caught in traps last year. How many were on private lands that they had no business being on? I would like to know how many dogs were killed by cars. How many dogs were poisened? How many shot?

There's no evidence that says wolverine are endangered more now than they were 20 years ago.

We have to remember that facts and perception are two different things. Much like any other political debate, the facts become victims to the best sound bytes. Emotion and "feelings" take precedent over the reality of what a trapping ban would mean.

Ben, you've stated you don't like trapping. Some in the Wildlife Federation don't either.

Will you and those others that don't like trapping rally behind us and vote against this ban, or the side with the anti's?

To be clear, I fought for the wolf trapping season. I support the trapping of fur-bearers and while it's not something I would engage in, I do believe that if done correctly and ethically, it is no different than hunting. I'll be in the fight to save trapping in Montana. I might take a more conservative approach to issues like carnivore management than a lot of folks in the hunting community, but that doesn't mean I don't support trapping. I hope we're square on that.

As far as wolverines go, we can agree to disagree on that. I'll still think of you as my Braveheart.

 

[Bambistew]

I'm neither for nor against trapping,. but trappers will never get my support . The biggest thing that sticks in my mind are dogs getting caught in traps. Trappers think its their god given right to trap where ever they want with disregard for the public. The "excuse" when a dog is caught and killed is always "why wasn't their dog on a leash?" Sure there are some animals that you could never save, but if I'm hiking in the woods I don't expect there to be a trap line along a public trail. I've seen traps less than 20 yards off a trail or less. That's akin to road hunting IMO.

People have just as much right to walk their dog off leash in the NF as you do to put out traps. Leash laws are not followed... How come hound hunters don't have to leash their dogs? What about bird hunters? I have zero sympathy for the houndsmen that lose dogs to wolves... They should have had them on a leash.

Good luck on your fight, but until you guys actually step back and see how you portray yourselves you'll never get the full support you want. Not giving a chit about anyone but yourselves is going to be your downfall.

IMO this is as much of a "hunters" fight as the 2nd amendment. Good luck.

 

[RobG]

I thought people where more outraged over the whole wolf program as they perceived it than the new season structures. My take on it, is the majority of those opposed to the new liberal seasons on wolves don't live in Montana.

It's going to be a battle for sure, we need to get out facts.

Supposedly 58 dogs were caught in traps last year. How many were on private lands that they had no business being on? I would like to know how many dogs were killed by cars. How many dogs were poisened? How many shot?

I spoke with a FWP person a while back about trapping - only a couple of the dogs were caught in wolf traps but the press always mixed wolf trapping with those 50+ dogs that were caught. Didn't see any letters clearing things up.

I do believe ballot initiatives can be overturned by the State Legislature. I saw it done in Idaho (term limits I think). They let the legislators in the few liberal districts oppose the vote to overturn, but there are so many rural districts it passed through.

 

[shoots-straight]

I'm neither for nor against trapping,. but trappers will never get my support . The biggest thing that sticks in my mind are dogs getting caught in traps. Trappers think its their god given right to trap where ever they want with disregard for the public. The "excuse" when a dog is caught and killed is always "why wasn't their dog on a leash?" Sure there are some animals that you could never save, but if I'm hiking in the woods I don't expect there to be a trap line along a public trail. I've seen traps less than 20 yards off a trail or less. That's akin to road hunting IMO.

People have just as much right to walk their dog off leash in the NF as you do to put out traps. Leash laws are not followed... How come hound hunters don't have to leash their dogs? What about bird hunters? I have zero sympathy for the houndsmen that lose dogs to wolves... They should have had them on a leash.

Good luck on your fight, but until you guys actually step back and see how you portray yourselves you'll never get the full support you want. Not giving a chit about anyone but yourselves is going to be your downfall.

IMO this is as much of a "hunters" fight as the 2nd amendment. Good luck.

So I see you paint all Trappers with the same broad brush that you do the few that give all of us the black eye.

So we have road hunters that disgust you? So lets not support hunting because of those damn road hunters.

Trappers have restrictions around trails and roads. They can't be closer than 50 feet of a numbered trail. Fewer dogs are caught in traps than you think. Just as Rob pointed out, very few got caught by the wolf hunters this year. Most dogs are caught by kids, or green novice trappers, trapping something else, and possible on private lands too. Although I don't have the stats, I' would guess a fair number of them took place there.

The highlighted remarks you made might be something you too should try.

PS, I've never caught a dog! Knock on wood.

 

[elkantlers]

Bambistew I agree with a lot of what you have said on other subjects, But your previous post is pure crap. Trapping is just like every other outdoor activity: there are good guys and bad guys. Just because a few bad apples make bad decisions it's no excuse to label us all as bad. Pretty narrow minded Bambi!

And, To say that hound hunters should keep their dog leashed it ridicules. I can tell from that statement how little you know about hound hunting.

 

[RobG]

... Trappers have restrictions around trails and roads. They can't be closer than 50 feet of a numbered trail. ...

Yikes - 50 feet isn't very far. Does it really need to be that close? Seems like if you moved that out it would likely eliminate much of the source of the bad publicity.

 

[Bambistew]

I was hoping to rile you up a bit... because I honestly think you need it, otherwise you're trapping is going to go the way of CO.

I don't care if you want to trap or not, but trappers have a lot of work to do in order to convince the public that trapping is ok. The first and probably best thing you could do is get pro-active and add some rules and force trappers to look out for others who use public lands, instead of saying that it's our "right" to do as we please, screw the rest of you. Or I've been doing this forever, you came along later, you're not going to make me change. Face it you're a very small (and shrinking) portion of the public, and the public is starting to realize this.

For starters I'd look at...
-mandatory minimum check time
-mandatory trappers education, and maybe require refresher courses
-up the minimum distance from roads and trails to something realistic, my dog can make it 50' in about 5 hops. I'm pretty sure you can set traps on ROW lines as well, or dam near... Distance yourself from the public as much as possible to minimize conflicts.
-incidental take means you're done trapping for the year, and maybe this triggers the refresher course?

If you take steps to limit your take of non-target animals, and increase your image as a whole, you might have a shot... for now. Right now I think the writing is on the wall in the near future unless you do something about it, and not sit back and expect others (hunters) to help you out, so you don't have to change.

I don't think a lot of people care for trapping for a number of reasons. In a trappers mind, an animal caught in foot hold trap can be released unharmed... because when you catch your finger/hand it doesn't really hurt, and I agree. Put your finger in that trap again and tie it to something, pull on it and run around in a circle about 100 times... and tell me how your finger feels. The real story is somewhere between one less leg and unharmed. The public isn't stupid. I haven't done a lot of trapping but managed to catch a few dozen yotes, a bunch of coons, fox and a few skunks. Released "unharmed" is a bit of a stretch each time, IMO. Survivable, yes... but like it never happened? A snared animal is a dead animal.

Of course you can minimize this by setting in areas where your target animal will be, etc, (read trappers ed) but incidental take happens. The publics perception is that it can be removed 100% by a ban. Take steps to make this number near zero. You said 58 dogs... A couple hounds get eaten by a pack of wolves and hunters get frothy at the mouth. Yet 58 dogs get caught in traps, and its no big deal? Which is it, you either care or you don't? Just looked at the total number of trapping licenses sold... close to 2 out of every 100 trappers will catch a dog. This isn't a big deal?

Curious how many animals caught, die of exposure or dehydration? I can't imagine many make it for 2-4 day. I'd be surprised if 50% of the animals caught in AK are alive by the time the trap is checked. Probably for the best, succumbing to exposure is probably pretty painless. It's trapping and part of the program, but this is what the public sees. Not really a way to sugar coat it, but minimizing it would go a long way I think... such as checking traps more regularly, which would also increase the chance of survival.

Like I said I could care less one way or the other about trapping. It doesn't bother me that people trap, but I know people that it does bother. I do not feel obligated to go out of my way to offer support, just because I'm a "hunter." Don't see you guys helping out the high fencer hunters, deer baiters, or deer/dog hunters, landowners, or MT non-resident hunters That said I wouldn't vote for a trapping ban either.

Trappers give me little reason to get behind them and offer support. I'm in no way obligated just because I'm a hunter.

Get on the offensive before it's too late... You may have to compromise some of your entitlements to save your heritage!

Elkantlers... I've been around plenty of hounds. The point I was making is that trappers blame the victim (dog) because they caught and killed it. Kind of like blaming a rape victim because they walked down the wrong street. The excuse is always, that their dog should be on a leash because its the law. So... hound dogs chasing cats or coons should also be required to be on a leash, on public land just like all dogs. It's a rare hound that will come back when released on a track. Houndsman have zero control of where they're dogs go, hence the reason I could care less that wolves eat a few... similar to trappers that could care less that they kill a few.

 

[elkantlers]

View attachment 35962Bambi, Most of your "concerns" are already taken care of.
From The Montana F&G website:
•Review trap set-back requirements. Montana law requires wolf traps on public lands to be set back at least 150 feet from a designated road or trail (50 feet for furbearer trapping); 1,000 feet from a trailhead (300 feet for other furbearers); and 1,000 feet from a public campground.
•Follow trap check requirements. Wolf trappers are required to visually check traps at least once in every 48 hours


You said people aren't stupid and they know that animals that are released are hurt but may survive. You must not know how to trap fur friendly. All my traps are laminated, which means they have a piece 3/16" square stock welded onto the top of the jaws which basically doubles the thickness of the jaws and makes them more comfortable for the animals. I also put multiple swivels on the chain so that as they move the chain never twists up. Thus keeping the animal from hurting it's self. I do many other things as well to help the animal.

 

[theat]

Bambistew - check this article out

http://billingsgazette.com/news/sta...cle_80a58ed7-b32d-54a7-8dce-a6aa905284ad.html

The Montana Trapping Association has been working with the FWP for years to try and reduce conflicts with other forest users. Other than what is mentioned in this article, they were also a driving force in NOT allowing snares for wolf trapping. If you read the article you will see that they are suggesting even further setbacks than what FWP wants.